Re: Ctrl-C ignored after pasting a long text in an X terminal emulator
On 2023-01-22 23:27:27 -0600, David Wright wrote:
> On Mon 23 Jan 2023 at 03:17:43 (+0100), Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2023-01-22 11:33:57 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > > This might be a limitation of Linux's pty(7) subsystem. The xterm
> > > manpage mentions the following:
> > >
> > > ,----
> > > | BUGS
> > > | Large pastes do not work on some systems. This is not a bug in
> > > | xterm; it is a bug in the pseudo terminal driver of those systems.
> > > | Xterm feeds large pastes to the pty only as fast as the pty will
> > > | accept data, but some pty drivers do not return enough information
> > > | to know if the write has succeeded.
> > > `----
> > >
> > > See also https://bugs.debian.org/273194 in xterm. Disclaimer: I do not
> > > have any expertise in that area.
> >
> > Thanks. Since several terminals are affected (I've tested xterm,
> > mlterm and GNOME Terminal), with exactly the same behavior, each
> > after 4095 characters, this is probably this bug.
>
> I'm unconvinced. The bug was exhibited when the paste was into an
> xterm running cat > /dev/null which should accept any amount of
> input. I've catted 275KB to a real file, and got a perfect copy
> every time.
Indeed, this works fine with xterm and GNOME Terminal, even with
"xterm; cat > foo" and the paste done before quitting the xterm
(or whatever command that will not terminate immediately). But
mlterm has some problems with that.
I suppose that the terminal can detect when the pty will no longer
accept additional characters. And the paste resumes as soon as
input is read by "cat".
With xterm, if I do the large paste with middle-click and type
abc<Ctrl-C>def, then the end of the paste is missing, probably
because the Ctrl-C occurred during the last write to the pty.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Reply to: